M, aged 36, is on trial in Montauban (Tarn-et-Garonne) on Tuesday 15 September 2026 for alledgedly passing on HIV to his former partner. The defendant was aware of his health status but concealed it from his ex-partner, with whom he had unprotected sex. “I hadn’t known for very long; I was afraid of how people would look at me,” the defendant testified.
Whilst waiting to take the stand at the Montauban Magistrates’ Court (Tarn-et-Garonne) on Tuesday 15 September 2026, M sat in the front row of the courtroom. After witnessing the swearing-in of a new public order officer (ASVP), his case is called by the three female magistrates from Tarn-et-Garonne.
Aged 36, the defendant – his muscular upper body concealed beneath a sky-blue T-shirt – keeps his hands clasped behind his back as the presiding judge reads out the grounds for his appearance. Although he had known he was HIV-positive since October 2013, M is accused of having transmitted HIV to his former partner with whom he had a relationship between 2014 and 2015, without her being aware of his infection. She discovered this in August 2015, after their relationship had ended.
“I regret what I did”
For much of the judicial investigation following the complaint, the defendant denied the allegations. This time, before the judges, this married father is taking responsibility for his actions. “I admit it, yes,” he replied to Presiding Judge Emmanuelle Yvert. “My aim was not to hurt her. I regret what I did. I was ashamed [of being HIV-positive]. I hadn’t known for very long, and I was afraid of how people would look at me,” he explains, referring to his repeated denials whenever the subject was raised.
“Why not be open with the woman you love?” the presiding judge asks him. “I should have told her. I infected a girl who hadn’t asked me for anything.” “She was devastated; she never received an explanation. You didn’t give her the chance to understand, even though she says she didn’t harbour any particular animosity towards you at the start,” the presiding judge points out. “Did you have any discussions with her?” the judge continues. “No,” is all M replies. His partner, for her part, wipes away the tears streaming down her cheeks.
“The gravity of the facts is overwhelming” for the prosecution
M subsequently made no secret of his HIV-positive status. “I told my wife as soon as we met, in August 2015,” says the defendant, who is taking his triple therapy much more seriously than he did during the months covered by the charges. This relationship led to marriage and the birth of three children. The first two have sadly passed away. The youngest, born in 2025, is in good health. HIV-negative. The only silver lining in the case.
After listening to the closing arguments of Prosecutor Marta, who emphasised “the overwhelming gravity of the offences, a stubborn concealment and erratic adherence to treatment”, Mr Nicolas Antonescoux attempted to offer a different interpretation of the facts.
“A criminal? No. A selfish person? I don’t know”
“Even if he apologises to you, that obviously changes nothing,” began the lawyer, looking the complainant in the eye. “I am simply providing some context for understanding. We, the children of the 1980s, grew up with awareness of this disease. For those born in the 1990s, that may be less the case.”
On intent: “He never wanted her to be infected. He was afraid of being treated like a leper. Does that make him a criminal? No. A selfish person? I don’t know. It’s unacceptable,” states Mr Antonescoux. “He has altered your life from what it should have been. I don’t care about the length of the sentence. But I think we can arrange for the custodial part to be served under electronic tagging as soon as the sentence is handed down. As for the rest, he intends to make amends for the damage as far as possible.”
The court granted the defence’s request, converting the two-year custodial sentence into electronic tagging from the outset. He still faces a three-year suspended sentence and must pay an advance of 30,000 euros to the complainant, pending the assessment of the total damages by a medical expert.
